Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRP/1818/2026 of Andela Pavan Kumar, Vs Andela Dahnunjaya, on 17 August 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] TUESDAY, THE 18th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1818/2026 Between: 1. ANDELA PAVAN KUMAR,, S/O ANDELA DAHNUNJAYA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS.
APHC010307032026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE 18th DAY OF AUGUST 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1818/2026
Between:
1. ANDELA PAVAN KUMAR,, S/O ANDELA DAHNUNJAYA, AGED
ABOUT 30 YEARS. BUSINESS, R/O D. NO.45/432-1, BALAJI
NAGAR-2 ROAD NO.5, KADAPA CITY, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT- 516003
...PETITIONER
AND
1. ANDELA DAHNUNJAYA, S/O A. VEERA BHADRAIAH, AGED ABOUT
59 YEARS, BUSINESS, R/O D.NO. 12/232, POTTI SREERAMULU
STREET, KADAPA CITY, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT- 516001.
2. ANDELA VEERENDRA, S/O A. VEERA BHADRAIAH, AGED ABOUT
26 YEARS, R/O D.NO.12/232, GROUND FLOOR, POTTI
SREERAMULU STREET, KADAPA CITY, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT-
516001.
3. SATISH KOLAPARTHI, S/O NARASIMHULU CHETTY, AGED ABOUT
57 YEARS, R/OD.NO.41/895-11, SHANKARAPURAM, KADAPA
CITY, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT- 516002.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased tomay be pleased to SET ASIDE the order dt.02-03-2026 passed in
I.A.No.794/2024 in O.S.No.49/2023 on the file of Honble Principal Civil Judge
(Senior Division), Kadapa to the extent of dismissed part and allow the same and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to STAY all further proceedings in O.S.No.49/2023 on the file of Hon’ble Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kadapa during pendency of this CRP and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. A SYAM SUNDAR REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. BALU ANIL KUMAR PALLA
2. PAPUDIPPU SASHIDAR REDDY
The Court made the following:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1818 OF 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The petitioner/plaintiff filed suit O.S.No.49 of 2023, on the file of learned Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division) Kadapa, seeking declaration of exclusive right and title of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property and to declare the registered settlement deed document No.814 of 2022 dated 07.01.2022, which stands in the name of defendant, as null and void in the eye of the law and for consequential reliefs.
2. While the suit is pending, the petitioner herein filed I.A.No.794 of 2024 under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Rule 28 of the Civil Rules of Practice read with Section 151 of C.P.C. seeking permission to implead the proposed respondent Nos.2 and 3 as defendant Nos.2 and 3 in the suit.
3. The learned trial Court, vide order dated 02.03.2026, partly allowed the interlocutory application and impleaded the 2nd respondent as party defendant in the suit and dismissed the application against the proposed respondent No.3 on the ground that the petitioner failed to explain as to how the presence of proposed respondent No.3 is essential to the suit, as there is no pleading regarding the execution of sale deed bearing Doc.No.6961 of 2023, by respondent No.1 in favour of proposed respondent No.3 and his presence for proper adjudication of the dispute in the affidavit of the petitioner.
4. As per the arguments of the learned counsel for respondents, it appears that the petitioner/plaintiff and respondents are family members.
5. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 conceded and stated that the application filed for impleadment be allowed in its entirety/ intoto.
6. In view of the concession of respondent No.3, the order dated 02.03.2026 passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kadapa, in I.A. No. 794 of 2024, to the extent of dismissing the application for impleadment of respondent No.3 is set aside. Consequently, I.A.No.794 of 2024 is allowed intoto/ in its entirety, and the petitioner is permitted to implead the proposed respondent No.3 as defendant No.3 in O.S.No.49 of 2023.
7. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. Further, the learned trial Court is consequently directed to permit the petitioner to amend the prayer in the suit. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 18.08.2026
KBN
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1818 of 2026
Date: 18.08.2026
KBN